What do you make of gay Jehovah's Witnesses take on their own homosexuality?

seahorse

Hi people; I'm just interested to hear what homosexuals, male and female, have to say about this: A relation of mine has a close friend who is now studying with the Jehovah's Witnesses and when I first heard of that I was surprised to say the least because he's very much gay; not a woman in sight, never has been interested in women in the least, and this man is in his fifties. I guess I'd have been less surprised if he was bi because in that case he'd still have had the option of forming a relationship with a woman, and marrying her of course, as is paramount to Jehovah's Witness directives, so in the case that he were bi he wouldn’t be expected to live the rest of his life in a state of celibacy; but obviously in the case of a person who is sexually attracted only to their own gender it is a much more serious commitment to make.

For anyone who doesn’t know, as far as the Witnesses (like the Catholic Church) are concerned the practice of homosexuality is sinful. Homosexuals themselves are welcome in the Jehovah's Witness congregation, as long as they do not actively practice their sexuality. Apparently there is no shortage of gay men and women in the congregation, who are living in a state of sexual abstinence as it runs perpendicular to their own religious views. I reckon it’d take a very strong sense of faith to reject your own sexuality and accept spending the rest of your life celibate. I’ve also considered that there may well be an internal sense of shame attached to an individuals view of their own sexuality as a prerequisite to their acceptance of it as sinful and immoral to the degree that they compelled themselves never to express it again.

I just find this a very interesting topic; because nobody forces a person to join the Jehovah’s Witnesses, yet the homosexuals who embrace that religious teaching do so in the knowledge and concurrence that they must reject the expression of their sexual selves. It sounds like a big deal to me; I’m curious to hear what people on here have to say about that?

Spyral

I just find this a very interesting topic; because nobody forces a person to join the Jehovah’s Witnesses, yet the homosexuals who embrace that religious teaching do so in the knowledge and concurrence that they must reject the expression of their sexual selves. It sounds like a big deal to me; I’m curious to hear what people on here have to say about that?

no different to RCC priests or buddisht monks or anyone else that gives up sex for a higher purpose

Hmm_Messiah

Was this sa serius thread?

You've decided some one is gay because he is middle-aged, single and " not a woman in sight"

You've also seem a bit confused - what exactly has sexuality got to do with celibacy - celibacy has nothing to do with denying your sexualit.

And if it did happens the guy in his 50's is struggling with sexuality, faith etc isn't that pretty much his own business.

seahorse

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

Was this sa serius thread?

Yes, of course.

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

You've decided some one is gay because he is middle-aged, single and " not a woman in sight"

The man is openly gay, and has been all his life.

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

You've also seem a bit confused - what exactly has sexuality got to do with celibacy - celibacy has nothing to do with denying your sexualit.

It does in this instance. (and this is in response to your post also Spyral): A celibate Catholic priest, for example, (assuming he is heterosexual) does not abstain from sex because his sexuality is considered sinful according to his faith; he abstains as a sacrifice to God. A homosexual priest will be required to abstain for the same reason, so the morality of his sexuality in the eyes of the Church is not at issue.

A homosexual man or woman within the Jehovah's Witness congregation, by comparison, abstains from sex because their sexuality is considered sinful by their own faith, and, as subscribers to that faith, by themselves also. The heterosexual men and women of the congregation are welcome to form relationships and consummate those within marriage, the homosexual men and women are not; so yes, I think there's a very big difference. It is obvious (to me anyway) that a homosexual person is undertaking a much bigger commitment, and expected to make a much more serious sacrifice in embracing the Jehovah's Witnesses faith than a heterosexual person.

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

And if it did happens the guy in his 50's is struggling with sexuality, faith etc isn't that pretty much his own business.

Of course it is, on an individual level, a persons own business; but this is something that is expected of ALL homosexual people within the Witness congregation (which is numbered at 6.5 million worldwide) I am considering studying the bible with the Witnesses myself and have a lot of questions I’d like to clarify in my own mind centred around its practices and beliefs before I come to a decision, and I’m just curious as to homosexuals opinions about this particular issue.

I'm getting the impression my post offended you for some reason. I don’t think you understood its points, but I should tell you; there was no offence intended.

Hmm_Messiah

If you were considerign studying the "Bible" I would definitely not suggest doing so with the Jehovah Witnesses.

Not only is their understanding steeped in the OT which is for the most part tribal law/norms rather than anythign religious or spiritual but I would struggle to see any sense in studying scripture with people who so fixate on the exact wording while in reality the term Jehovah never appears in the bible and so at the most basic level they are in error.


Studying scripture though would be a cool thing, the RC actually do quite interesting courses, in that rather than using the text to enforce law and dogma they good courses can open it to a much more spiritual experience. I remember an analysis of the " feeding of the five thousand" and it was quite remarkable

I also remember a study on the sections of the NT looking at the supposed ban on divorce - the realit in the primary text was that a translation task might off been erronous, if a sentence is moved from the bottom of one paragraph to the start of the one below it the whole meaning differs.


And sorry, - its just the way you spoke of this man sounded like you were assuming he was gay.

Boston

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

Was this sa serius thread?

You've decided some one is gay because he is middle-aged, single and " not a woman in sight"

You've also seem a bit confused - what exactly has sexuality got to do with celibacy - celibacy has nothing to do with denying your sexualit.

And if it did happens the guy in his 50's is struggling with sexuality, faith etc isn't that pretty much his own business.

Amazing! not a single attempt to answer the question. Its not your place to decide if a thread is serious or not.

SeaHorse, without fail religious gays do my head in, I avoid them and all there internalised guilt.

Hmm_Messiah

Boston wrote:

Amazing! not a single attempt to answer the question. Its not your place to decide if a thread is serious or not.

SeaHorse, without fail religious gays do my head in, I avoid them and all there internalised guilt.

1. I didn't "decide" anything , see the "?" that means I asked a question.

2. I think its entirely within "my place" to question the seriousness of any topic, its not like there are no pointless, trolling, or "funny" threads started.

3. I did answer his question, before you made you well considered contibution, I imagine it just suited your purpose to not notice.

4. the OP has already replied to my post, what need was there for yours?

5. You don't seem to get the intricacies of the use of english, but either way your apparent need to antagonise is boring .

These religious gays ? the wiccan ones? the buddhist, the reformed Jew , all do your head in ? Is there anything that doesn't?

ness

LegacyUser

I just saw this post and wanted to comment—Yes, I know it’s old, but people search the Internet and come across such things. Anyway, to:

If you were considerign studying the "Bible" I would definitely not suggest doing so with the Jehovah Witnesses.

Couldn’t disagree more.

Not only is their understanding steeped in the OT which is for the most part tribal law/norms rather than anythign religious or spiritual but I would struggle to see any sense in studying scripture with people who so fixate on the exact wording while in reality the term Jehovah never appears in the bible and so at the most basic level they are in error.

You simple don’t know what you’re talking about here. JW's focus is very much in the NT, all Mosaic laws in the OT have been done away with… Further, “Jehovah” appears in most all Bibles in a Psalm. In the orginal Hebrew, almost 7,000 times (7,000!!!), and in the Greek over 100.
I implore you to study your Bible and do the research!!! If it makes you feel any better, secular history backs up almost everything JW believe. A person just has to do the research.

PhantomBeaker

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

These religious gays ? the wiccan ones? the buddhist, the reformed Jew , all do your head in ? Is there anything that doesn't?

Seconded - There's more to religion than just the Roman Catholic church.

Plus, there are some devout Christians (I think they're RCs, but I can't be sure) that I know that have no problem with homosexuality.

Also, didn't there used to be (and they may still exist, but I don't know) a group in outhouse for gay Christians? Something tells me they weren't exactly suffering from guilt, internalised or otherwise.

Aoife

seahorse

study wrote:

Couldn’t disagree more.

Nor could I.

study wrote:

You simple don’t know what you’re talking about here. JW's focus is very much in the NT, all Mosaic laws in the OT have been done away with…

True.

study wrote:

Further, “Jehovah” appears in most all Bibles in a Psalm. In the orginal Hebrew, almost 7,000 times (7,000!!!), and in the Greek over 100.

True again.

study wrote:

I implore you to study your Bible and do the research!!! If it makes you feel any better, secular history backs up almost everything JW believe. A person just has to do the research.

Isnt it amazing what people will believe, without ever having taken the time to check it out for themselves! It's quite frightening actually! :eek:

Boston

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

2. I think its entirely within "my place" to question the seriousness of any topic, its not like there are no pointless, trolling, or "funny" threads started.

Think what you like mate, moderators are the ones who decide if a thread has merit not you.

5. You don't seem to get the intricacies of the use of english, but either way your apparent need to antagonise is boring .

Hey, when you have a degree, maybe I'll listen to you pretend to be more intelligent then me, maybe.

These religious gays ? the wiccan ones? the buddhist, the reformed Jew , all do your head in ? Is there anything that doesn't?

ness

Theologists, basically people like you. If you want to know why, look at the "is there anything" comment. Religion isn't the be all and end all of life

Hmm_Messiah

study wrote:

You simple don’t know what you’re talking about here. JW's focus is very much in the NT, all Mosaic laws in the OT have been done away with… Further, “Jehovah” appears in most all Bibles in a Psalm. In the orginal Hebrew, almost 7,000 times (7,000!!!), and in the Greek over 100.
I implore you to study your Bible and do the research!!! If it makes you feel any better, secular history backs up almost everything JW believe. A person just has to do the research.

The word jehovah does not appear in the primary sources including the greek text. It a created word combining consonants and vowels from the words adonai and YHWH.

This is a simple demonstrable fact .

And which bible should I study? The Koran ? The Talmud? The Book of Mormon? Oh the "christian bible" Which version? which translation? including or excluding which books? The Gospel of Mary ?of Thomas?

In authentic religious belief faith is not meant to dis-engage reason, and chttp://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=53621000
boards.ie - Reply to Topicognitive abilities. but this has very little todo with the original OP

I've not checked outside today - has the world ended yet?

Phil@witnesses

Those interested to explore in more depth the viewpoint of some of Jehovah's Witnesses who have a homosexual orientation may find it helpful to look at www.witnesses.plus.com

teemm

What happens when you're gay and religious and your religion has very specific anti gay attitudes. You get a conflict. In an earlier generation and I suspect among conservative christians particularly in America. This conflict is resolved by rejecting the gay side. Remember too that many religious believe being gay is a lifestyle choice. We all know that's absurd. Did you choose to be gay ages 12 or 13? Girls, boys hmm, lets toss a coin. I long ago came to the conclusion that anyone who believes in the choice must have that choice. Thus they are gay but deny it to themselves and everyone else. How often does the most rampant homophobe turn out to gay? There was a case only recently in the States, where an anti gay preacher proved to be raving hyprocrite.

That's probably why so many priests were actually gay. You can see the thinking. If I become a priest and celibate the temptation will go. Flawed logic of course. But you have to remember even straight sex was sin, still is really if you enjoy it:)

So if you turn to religion, your gayness goes away and God will forgive as long as you abstain. It's all part of this persistent perception that being gay is a terrible sinful thing. Rating somewhere along stealing and murder.

So while the Jehovah's witnesses may seem somewhat enligthened, it's still considered a sin to practice your God given inclination.

Absurd!

seahorse

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

The word Jehovah does not appear in the primary sources including the greek text. It a created word combining consonants and vowels from the words adonai and YHWH.

I thought I ought to respond to this; I have begun studying with the witnesses and one of the first questions I asked was where the name Jehovah originated from. The woman told me that it was the English translation of the Hebrew name 'Yahweh', which is included in the ancient Hebrew scribes over 7000 times. I asked her how do we know the translation is accurate, since this ancient language is no longer in current use. Her answer really surprised me; she said;

"We don’t know for sure, and we don’t claim to. We know that if it is not accurate, it is close, and we regard making an attempt to understand the name of God and include it in our prayers as very important, because as Jesus taught, in showing us how to pray, it is important that we venerate his fathers name, as is taught in the Lords Prayer; "blessed be thy name" - it doesn’t say, blessed be thy title."

I asked her wasn’t it disrespectful to venerate the name of Jehovah, when it wasn’t a sure-fire certainty that that was an accurate translation, and she said;

"No, I don’t think so. For example, I know a foreign man who has a very complicated sounding name and most people have trouble saying it, but it dosent bother this man because he takes the attitude that at least people are trying and making the effort, and not just taking the lazy way and referring to him as 'Mister'. We regard referring to God as Jehovah in the same way, and we know that God understands our failings and that if we have misinterpreted his name he will forgive us for that. The important thing is that we have tried."

UU

Hmmm... interesting. Would not fancy celibacy myself but thank God I am an atheist! Lol!

LegacyUser

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

If you were considerign studying the "Bible" I would definitely not suggest doing so with the Jehovah Witnesses.

Not only is their understanding steeped in the OT which is for the most part tribal law/norms rather than anythign religious or spiritual but I would struggle to see any sense in studying scripture with people who so fixate on the exact wording while in reality the term Jehovah never appears in the bible and so at the most basic level they are in error.


Studying scripture though would be a cool thing, the RC actually do quite interesting courses, in that rather than using the text to enforce law and dogma they good courses can open it to a much more spiritual experience. I remember an analysis of the " feeding of the five thousand" and it was quite remarkable

I also remember a study on the sections of the NT looking at the supposed ban on divorce - the realit in the primary text was that a translation task might off been erronous, if a sentence is moved from the bottom of one paragraph to the start of the one below it the whole meaning differs.


And sorry, - its just the way you spoke of this man sounded like you were assuming he was gay.

I would like to point out that the JWs adhere to the NT more so than the OT, which they say (correctly) IIRC, overtook the OT covenent.

At any rate, Paul did say in his letters to Timothy that men who lie with men would not inherit God's Kingdom. JW or not, its in black and white text. JWs are no different, the bible says X, thus X is a requirement. Duh.

Marcus.Aurelius

UU wrote:

Hmmm... interesting. Would not fancy celibacy myself but thank God I am an atheist! Lol!

There's a lot of ignorant talk being bandied about around here. If you're a JW, you get married, have kids, like everyone else. You are required to abstain from sex until marriage.

Anyway the book of Timothy directly says that "men who lie with men" would not inherit God's Kingdom.

If you are gay, why in God's name (excuse the contradiction) would you study the bible if that's what it says???

Marcus.Aurelius

teemm wrote:

So while the Jehovah's witnesses may seem somewhat enligthened, it's still considered a sin to practice your God given inclination.

Absurd!

And we are still awaiting proof that the inclination is genetic or simply a confused brain. Perhaps you should keep an open mind, perhaps genetic studies in years to come will shed some light on the matter

And, just to clarify, I am not gay or a JW, just came across this thread while browsing.

Hmm_Messiah

seahorse wrote:

I thought I ought to respond to this; I have begun studying with the witnesses and one of the first questions I asked was where the name Jehovah originated from. The woman told me that it was the English translation of the Hebrew name 'Yahweh', which is included in the ancient Hebrew scribes over 7000 times. I asked her how do we know the translation is accurate, since this ancient language is no longer in current use. Her answer really surprised me; she said;

"We don’t know for sure, and we don’t claim to. We know that if it is not accurate, it is close, and we regard making an attempt to understand the name of God and include it in our prayers as very important, because as Jesus taught, in showing us how to pray, it is important that we venerate his fathers name, as is taught in the Lords Prayer; "blessed be thy name" - it doesn’t say, blessed be thy title."

I asked her wasn’t it disrespectful to venerate the name of Jehovah, when it wasn’t a sure-fire certainty that that was an accurate translation, and she said;

"No, I don’t think so. For example, I know a foreign man who has a very complicated sounding name and most people have trouble saying it, but it dosent bother this man because he takes the attitude that at least people are trying and making the effort, and not just taking the lazy way and referring to him as 'Mister'. We regard referring to God as Jehovah in the same way, and we know that God understands our failings and that if we have misinterpreted his name he will forgive us for that. The important thing is that we have tried."

An interesting post, and the woman indeed has a point.

But it remains the case, and the contradiction that JW rely on the truth of a text, and on one hand limit very much how its open to interpretation but on the other hand, in this case, seem less bothered about the translation?

I also find it strange a deity would create a scripture based religion and not ensure his name was preserved in there somewhere .

LegacyUser

Gods name has been preserved in the Hebrew Scriptures nearly 7,000 times. It was written as 4 letters JHVH or YHWH. The ancient Hebrews didn’t use vowels (even though they do today) but everyone knew then how to pronounce the names and words. The same is true when we read our words today.

The problem arose from a misunderstanding of the Commandment "do not take God's name in vain". Of course this means do not use it in a worthless or disrespectful way. Instead the Jewish religious leaders stopped using it altogether! Hence “Lord” or “Adonai” was substituted when reading out loud.

As you know the original Bible was written over roughly 1,600 years in Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek because these were the languages of the day. Most modern translations are taken from the original languages so have the opportunity to be accurate.

At the end of the book of Revelation, Jesus warns anyone against adding to or taking away a word from the Holy Scriptures. Many Bible translations have actually removed God's name and added a Title, taking away his personal name. Jesus showed his disciples how to pray with the Lords Prayer, the first this he said was "Our Father in Heaven, Hallowed be thy name"

Interestingly in all CofE Churches, the King James Translation has Jehovah's name in Psalm 83:18 but the revised King James has it removed! You have to ask yourself...why?

Why don’t "they" want you to know or use his personal name? Could it be that they don’t want you to come to know him and love him?

In Revelation 12:9 we are told that someone is trying to mislead us all. I would say he is being pretty effective, but not with everyone.

As Jesus said "The truth will set you free"!

Ask JWs about this the next time they call.